The Italianist

The recent events in Italy have caused some turbulence in Italy’s political class. First, Berlusconi has resigned as Prime Minister, an event that led to celebrations in the streets of Italy unseen since the 2006 Football World Cup Final. Given the lack of success of Italian football teams, politics gave the Italians a chance to feel pride at their country again.

These celebrations have been immediately condemned by important newspapers such as Il Giornale, owned by Silvio Berlusconi, for their aggressiveness, vulgarities, and display of hatred. What was overlooked by the important newspaper was the image of members of Berlusconi’s giving the finger to the crowd in front of them as they were leaving Palazzo Grazioli after B’s resignation.

Second, Mario Monti has been appointed as new Prime Minister. Monti is a man whose character  could not be more different from Berlusconi’s (hopefully). In the current economic and political turmoil, there has been a general appeal to follow his example and “moderate the tone” of the discussion, the latter being an art in which Italian politicians have never really excelled (see the previous video).

Take Francesco Storace. A man of the Right, member of the now-extinct Alleanza Nazionale, ex-ally of Gianfranco Fini (who last year, for a moment, looked like Berlusconi’s main antagonist), Storace is famous for his reply to a journalist who once asked him to say something right-wing: “You faggot!”, he said, to fulfill the journalist’s request.

Storace, like many others in Italy, struggles with moderating the tone of the discussion. Two days ago, at the convention of his political movement La Destra (“The Right”: one can imagine the massive brainstorming they had to go through before picking this name), while talking on the stage, he openly attacked Fini, yelling “Now you must resign too! Now you have to become unemployed too! You must go get a job! Pig!! Pig!!!” The crowd in front of him cheered and clapped hands – surely in a moderated way.

Interviewed on Radio24, Storace minimized the event. “I did not say maiale (pig), I said meno male (thank God)”, he said, laughing. The interviewers laughed back and replied “Come one, be serious: you’ve said some pretty serious stuff about the third figure of the State” (Fini is the President of the Chamber of Deputies).  After a few more jokes, Storace concluded:

“I did say maiale, but I did it unbeknownst to me”.

(The audio interview, in Italian, can be found here.)

The Italian Government is always working hard to improve and polish the legal system, so to facilitate the pursuit of justice and to free citizens from the shackles of bureaucracy. This time, the Northern League, who prides itself of having, among its members, the Minister for Legislative Simplification, has come up with yet another valuable law to protect citizens’ interest.

The proposal, advanced for the second time after a first, failed attempt in 2009, aims to protect “the right to oblivion”. It comes from another fine politician in the Northern League, Miss. Carolina Lussana. This is Carolina Lussana:

The picture portrays her altruism at work. During a vote in the House of Chambers, she is pressing not only her own button,  but also that of someone who does not participate in the vote. Some would say that what she is doing is illegal: however, as I explain below, the right to oblivion will guarantee that this picture will be removed shortly in the near future. So look at it until you can.

Carolina is concerned with a great anomaly of the Internet. When someone commits a crime, it is possible, years later, for people to find out about that. Hence, she is now fighting so to guarantee that, after a certain amount of time, the information (texts and images) about someone’s crimes will not be accessible anymore by the public.

The core of the argument is the following:

Some people, let’s face it, violate the law. Some, as it happens, pay for their crimes. After they’ve done so, if one keeps talking about those crimes, he or she violates their privacy. If, to give an absurd example, a man corrupts a politician to win a contract, and he is then condemned, then how could one justifiably look him up on the internet, years later, to find out about his past crime? We need to limit the access to this kind of information, so to limit the “suffering of the person who committed the crime, and of his family”.

Carolina highlights the dangers looming behind technical advancement: “Before the advent of the Internet, the echo of one’s judiciary happenings disappeared reasonably soon, as soon as the interest of the local and national press for that particular fact had gone down. Yet, nowadays, any fact can remain forever on the web, unless the webmaster intervenes to remove it.”

She argues that the left-over of one’s illegal deeds ought to be removed from the internet within a time that varies according to the crime committed. Thos who refuse to forget others’ crime, and keep information about them on their website, will incur a fine between 5,000 and 100,000 euros.

The story, in Italian, can be found here

The Italian Newspaper La Repubblica points out an interesting fact about Google Translate. If you type in the sentence “Io ho votato Berlusconi”, Google translates correctly with “I did vote for Berlusconi”.

But if you write “Io non ho votato Berlusconi” (“I did not vote for Berlusconi”), Google gives you the same translation as before: “I did vote for Berlusconi”.

The same happens for translations from many other languages. However, if instead of Berlusconi, a different politician’s name is put in the sentence, Google does translate correctly. More details here.

Willing to improve my English, I just went on Google Translate, and tried myself: however, the mistake pointed out by La Repubblica does not seem to happen. What does happen is, nonetheless, that when you write ‘Berlusconi’, the translation is slightly awkward (“I do not have voted Berlusconi”), whereas it comes up correctly (“I did not vote for X”) with a different name.

Why does Google get things messed up when it comes to him? Who’s been fecking around with the translations of Berlusconi? According to unofficial sources, the Mafia has been hijacking Google Translate, so that people cannot get it right when they write about Berlusconi in other languages, thus undermining the Italian PM’s credibility abroad.

Don’t know what happens with the other languages.

A worker from Albania died while at work in a building site in Northern Italy. He fell off one of the scaffoldings. In dealing with the compensation claims for the victim’s family, who lives still in Albania, a judge yesterday ruled that they should be given 1/10 of what is normally paid to the family of victims who are Italians.

That is correct: a judge ruled that the company that hired the Albanian, and that was responsible for his death due to scarce health and safety regulations, will have to compensate the victim’s family, but will have to pay less than what they would pay if the worker had been Italian. The reasoning behind this decision is that the worker was from an “economically depressed” country, and the compensation claim of the family should be adjusted to the economic reality of Albania. So, for example, if in Italy you need 1000 euro per month to survive, and in Albania 100 euro could be enough, then an Albanian should receive 1/10 of the compensation owed to an Italian.

We are talking about compensation for death. We are talking about people  who work as much as the Italians do. We are talking of people who are exposed to dangerous working conditions because their bosses do not want to waste their money in safety regulations. Now, a judge says that the parents of a worker at work should be paid less so to avoid the risk of “unjustified enrichment”. That’s true, look what these immigrants invent in order to steal our money: they come here and work 14 hours per day, then at some point they jump off the scaffolding so to extort money from their bosses. Damn you, immigrants!

Luckily, justice is in place to defend the country. A judge has finally established that there is no need, for building companies, to raise their safety standard by investing money in safety measures. Quite the contrary, they should simply hire more immigrants: they are much much cheaper to refund. And the boss’ one, I’m sure the judge would say, is a justified enrichment.

It follows, then, that if then worker, who dies in Italy, was from the Emirates, or from Monaco, or from the Vatican, then his/her family should be paid 10 times more to reflect the economic reality of the country of origin. So, maybe some priests are rejoicing at this legal ruling..

For more on “white deaths“, a typical Italian phenomenon, see here.

(blogs.panorama.it)

We all know that one of the main reasons why Berlusconi is a great politician is because he can talk to people with people’s language. Rather than using complex jargon that normal citizens could not understand, he appeals to everyday talk, so to reach the hearth of his beloved, and loving, voters, I mean compatriots.

Such approach was made immortal when Berlusconi famously defined himself “a worker President”, namely a usual worker paid 800 Euros per month, who nonetheless finds himself to be a billionaire, the owner of most of the media, and the country’s ruler.

He loves going among his own people. He does not like it very much when others talk: however, when it comes to him talking, he does perform at his best.

Last week, a video appeared of one of these political performances, which took place in L’Aquila, Italy, just before the G8 meeting in July 2009. The Italian PM, during one of his, at that time, frequent visits to that earthquake-striken land, hangs out with a group of military, and decides to tell them a funny joke, a specialty of his.

The joke, unsurprisingly, hinges around Rosy Bindi. This is Rosy Bindi:

She is the not-so-charming female politician from the Left, who Berlusconi has targeted several times, once famously saying that she was more beautiful than intelligent. In L’Aquila, he could not help going back to his repressed sexual desire for her.

His witty joke, still referring to Bindi’s lack of those political qualities that he cares about, has however a surprising conclusion: it ends with a profanity that the subject of the story utters when facing Bindi’s ugliness. In fact, the core of the story lies in the subject saying “Orcoddio” when seeing her, which literally translated means “God is a pig”. This is what in Italian is called a “bestemmia“. A short film of this comic intercourse between Berlusconi and the military can be found here. Funny enough, the movie ends with Berlusconi telling his audience “You won’t betray me, will you?”. Sadly, someone did.

Berlusconi’s perfection notwithstanding, someone might have felt not at ease. Italy is, first and foremost, a catholic country, hence it should not let profanities go uncondemned. Furthermore, Berlusconi opponents could have stopped boiling children for a moment, pointing out to the fact that in Italy profanity is a crime, hence Silvio could face the legal consequences of his witty joke.

Thank God, or pig, the Vatican stepped in to have its influential voice heard on this question. Monsignor Fisichella was quick to specify that things ought to be “put into context”, and that we should not “instumentalise” an event without looking at the particular circumstances.

But how do you put into context a profanity? And, most of all, isn’t this a case of what His Infallible Sanctity the Pope has condemned as “relativism”?

Apparently, not. Catholics, as usual, if you’re awake send me a signal.

The Vatican is always in the first row in the fight against the evil. We see it everyday, with the never-ending effort of its ministers and leaders to spread the word of the Lord and defend it against the vices lurking in contemporary society. The media are also employed to make sure that the good words reach the delicate ears of the faithful. Not accidentally is the Vatican in the heart of Italy, a country where its missionary aims do find a very fertile soil.

Like all the heroes fighting for justice, however, the Vatican too has had too face obstacles and criticisms in the face of recent scandals. One of those who strenuously rejected the allegations against the Church is bishop Giacomo Babini.

This is Don Giacomo:

In April 2010, he stood up to defend the Pope against the various accusations moved against him. Recognizing the gravity of the alleged scandal, Don Giacomo decided to speak up and to warn the public that a scary plot was in action to undermine the Vatican’s image. Giacomo’s shocking revelation about the plot can be found here.

Not only is Giacomo a bishop, he is also an emeritus bishop. When one is an emeritus bishop, whatever that means, it must also mean that he has to do more than a normal bishop. So Giacomo felt compelled to say more about the scandals in which the Vatican seems to be involved, particularly in connection to pedophilia, a long lasting element of the Vatican’s missionary practice. Don Giacomo has been interviewed a few days ago on a catholic blog (I do not mention the blog itself, but you can find a report about that interview on this more hit-deserving website). On that occasion, he was asked to explain his thoughts on the concept of homosexual priests.

Here is Giacomo’s telling answer (my catholic translation): “I already said, many times, that I consider homosexuality a real perversion against nature. Now, if these things [namely, being homosexual] are committed in such an obscene way by priests, then it would be the case that, as it once used to be done, we should send these priests to life jail. (…) Homosexuality in a priest, if translated into a depraved practice, is even worse than pedophilia. (…) As a priest, I would be more sympathetic with a paedophile who repents, and suffers for his condition, than with these vicious beings. I tell you more, if I had met a paedophile priest, I would not have denounced him, I would have tried to redeem him. A father, such as a bishop is for the priests, does not denounce his sons who do wrong and repent. However, with the vicious ones we must be intransigent.” Catholically added emphasis.

“Sorry kids, we need to redeem these guys. Now shut up and go back into that dark corner, until we come and get you again.” They must have removed this last bit from the interview..

A comment on the Vatican, from a world-wide famous, and recently deceased, Professor of the London School of Economics, can be found here.

Not a glorious day in the history of Italian football. After 34 years, and 4 years after winning the World Cup, Italy was today eliminated from the tournament at a very early stage. The media are not being nice to the Azzurri: the most moderate comment I have found is “Go home, in shame” (La Gazzetta dello Sport).

The Italian coach, Marcello Lippi, spoke after the match and took full responsibility for the dismal performance of the Italian team.

“It’s my complete responsibility -Lippi said shortly after today’s 2-3 defeat against Slovakia. – If a team comes to an event of this importance with fear in its legs, mind, heart, it means that the coach has not trained it well psychologically, technically and  tactically. It is evident I did not prepare the team as I should have. I am very sorry. Thank you.”

Lippi will not be the coach of the Italian team any longer. He said he will not coach for a while. He will rest for a few months to decide what to do in the future.

Then, with a strange light in his eyes, Lippi added that he will retire into the Abbey of MonteCassino, to read books, to prey, and to play foosball with the monks.

He will also devolve 3,000,000 euros (i.e. the wage he received to train Italy for the World Cup) to sponsor young football talents in South Africa.

A couple of days ago, I posted on Facebook some vague ranting about the Italian Government’s last performances. Some people commented on that post, loosely sharing my feelings, but a friend of mine wrote something that caused some puzzlement in my bald head. Now, having spent the last 48hours dealing with World Cup flu (the famous infection that keeps you in bed with headache, while all your friends gather to watch the Football World Cup), I have had the chance to ponder a bit more over that comment.

My friend wrote: “It was just an effective example of how one can apply marketing to politics”.

For an Italian, this comment does not sound new. If anything, in fact, it sounds like an old advertisement.  Supporters of the Italian PM have often repeated (over the past sixteen years) that Berlusconi is a self-made man, who created an empire from nothing, who runs the country as he runs his business, that is, successfully. Thus, the argument goes, when someone feels unpleased by Italy’s legal enactments, it is because they lack an understanding of the principles of economy. Enough, therefore, with being astonished/depressed about  people still voting for Berlusconi: in fact, it turns out they are the ones who really understand how the market runs.

I confess, my knowledge of the market is scarce, to say the least. The friend who made the comment on Facebook recently turned from philosophy to human resources (is that really a change? mah..), so she probably has a more profit-oriented approach than I do. I know something about political theory though, and know that often in politics “the end justifies the means”. But that hasn’t helped me grasp the economic principles in action in Italy’s choices – given it is not clear what the end of most Italian policies would be.

So, I went and look on the Web for specialised articles, to find discussions about how Berlusconi applies effectively marketing to politics. The big guys of finance will tell me!  - I thought, while sneezing and coughing. So I looked at the Financial Times, which gave me some confusing insight. Actually, seriously confusing.

A longer and more in-depth analysis told me that “the Italian economy continued to contract sharply in the third quarter of 2008 as exports fell sharply – declining at the fastest rate in three years – under the impact of a global slump which weighed down on foreign demand for Italian products, and pushed the Italian economy into its worst recession since at least 1975. Sales of Italian goods abroad fell 1.6 percent from the previous quarter, their biggest decline since 2005.”  This is probably communist press, though.

I eventually looked into one of the most well-known liberal magazines in the market economy, The Economist. They will tell me why we should rejoice at Berlusconi’s capacity to apply effectively the market to politics. The Economist seems to have, in fact, a strong position regarding this point:

Why is it so hard to grasp the magic behind the PM’s policies? Why can’t we, backward-looking critics of Berlusconi’s rule, have the same financial understanding of his electorate?  This makes me suffer, and my flu go worse. Especially because I want to give a strong reply to those who say that Berlusconi is not what he looks like. And to the allegation that he, at times, seems not really concerned with the common good. Is there any market expert out there who can help? Because, to be honest, Berlusconi is effectively applying something to politics, but I am not sure it is the market.

In September this year, the Pope Benedict XVI will pay an official visit to UK. Everyone is waiting for this event with trepidation: both intellectuals and normal citizens discuss what should be done to give Ratzinger the best welcome. The Vatican itself does not hide its excitement about the visit.

Unfortunately, today things got a bit shaky. Courtesy of the Sunday Telegraph, it transpired that the UK Home Office may not be taking this visit too seriously. The issue hinges around a memo written after a brainstorming over the Ideal Pope’s visit. The whole story is here.

Surprisingly, this accident is receiving much more attention in UK than in Italy. The Italian websites mention this accident just in passing. This is partly justified by the fact that today, 25^th April, is an important date in Italy: it is the anniversary of the defeat of Fascism in 1945. The media attention has therefore focused on the celebrations taking place around the Belpaese. Among these, there has been a speech on TV by the Italian Prime Minister.

Now that elections are gone and that the TV can go back to talk politics, Berlusconi appeared on TV to tell citizens about the value of freedom, democracy, and…. the necessity to change the Italian Constitution. His argument highlighted the obvious strong connection between freedom, democracy, and himself becoming more and more powerful.

Thus,  little room is left, on Italian websites, to the Pope accident. The few articles I have found loosely refer to an incompetent with-collar in the Home Office, who has been ‘removed’ already. It  also seems to me that words have often been translated in a vaguely instrumental way (“silly” became “idiot”, “far-fetched” became “hard-core”, etc.). All they seem to do is to highlight that something very stupid, thus not worth discussing, happened somewehere in England..

Catholics may well feel upset by this memo: how can the British ask the Pope to do something against child abuse? And what’s this crazy thing, blessing gay couples! Gay people have no rights; in fact, they are a threat to society. Nonetheless, I think Catholics would have an interest in having the issue discussed on the Italian media. Actually, they may even ask the Pope to change plans and cancel the visit to UK. This would throw many academics and common people into dismal, true: yet, respect is respect.

Instead, the Italian media have remained quite silent on the Pope memo. No one wants to talk about it. Let’s forget it all happened, and let’s focus on freedom and democracy.

(Posters appeared today in the streets of Rome, celebrating Mussolini: “An idea vanishes, when no one is able to defend it anymore” . The phrase was meant to criticise the celebrations for the 25th of April)